Does anyone do their own photo printing?

Thomas Lawrence · May 23, 2012

I used to until I discovered it was easier and cheaper to have Walmart or Shutterfly do it. Lately thought I've had second thoughts. At least some of the prints I want to do myself, if only for the satisfaction of making a beautiful print.

I currently have an all in one HP printer which really was not made for printing photos. I'd like to know some of the good ones. I've heard Canon's are good because the company also has been in the camera business a long time, but haven't had the opportunity to find out for sure.

I figure at a site like this, someone would know something. Wouldn't you think?

Let me know your thoughts on this.

Thanks.

Pupator · May 23, 2012

Printing for the satisfaction of doing it yourself is the right reason to do your own prints. It will certainly be more expensive, more labor intensive, and (at best) no better quality than using a good commercial printer. Walmart and Shutterfly are not very good printers and you'd notice a significant improvement in quality if you went with EZPrints, Bay Photo, or MPix. Costco can do a great job too if you're willing to work and profile a little bit to make it happen.

Legitimate photo printers (like the Canon Pro 9000) are pretty pricey. And that's before you buy the ink. In my opinion, you really have to want a lot of satisfaction from printing yourself to justify the cost.*

There are lots of threads about printing that you can find with a search. Search around the forums for "print" and you'll see lots of other opinions.

(*There are some business cases for self-printing also - like on-site fulfillment.)

zoomer · May 23, 2012

I use the Canon Pro 9000. Very happy with it, good prints and easy to get set up and going.
I was lucky and right out of the box my colors on the prints match my screen pretty much exactly.

Helvegr · May 23, 2012

I've stuck with Epson printers. It seemed like every time I found a professional that I liked, and looked what they were using to print, it was always and Epson.

I have an Epson 3880 that I really enjoy. The ink is expensive, but when you look at the cost per print, including paper, its a great deal cheaper then many labs I've looked at.

Personally printing has taught me a lot about photography. The fact that people have gotten so use to to their pictures on the web has also stunted peoples knowledge of printing. I've learned a great deal about a strict color managed workflow and other factors to get the print to come out nice.

Plus then you get to start playing around with papers. There are so many fantastic papers out there its fun just trying them with your pictures, using different textures and such. Having Costco or somebody crank out a print just doesn't seem like you are doing it justice.

However, I also think that applies a lot more when you are doing something like fine art. Other types of printing are probably just a easily done commercially to save time, effort and possibly money.

Truth be told though, when you watch your first 13x19 print roll off the printer, its a grand experience!

joeinmiami · May 23, 2012

I have an Epson Stylus Photo R280, It is a cheap printer ($70.00) but I am very happy of the quality of the prints it produces. It uses 6 different colors cartridges, and to buy them it is about $80.00, much more that the printer itself. This printer is only used for photos, I have 2 other printers for documents, and I may print 5 or 6 8x10s once a month or so so the cartridge last me a reasonable amount of time.

The only thing I miss is the ability to print 16x20 prints, but, then again, you can not have every thing!

Joe

PD maybe I can convince my wife of letting me buy a printer that can print the 16X20, the only problem is the cost, over $1000!

mercphoto · May 23, 2012

One more nod for Epson. Not only nice printers, but the largest selection of paper types by far.

Zerodog · May 23, 2012

I print a lot myself. I feel like it is the single biggest improvement to my photography. I shoot to print. I had an Epson 2880 as my primary printer. Until I bought an Epson 4900. I now use the Epson 2880 for events and special things the 4900 doesn't do will. Like small prints or feed through printing. The 4900 took quite a bit of figuring out and cursing. But I have now grown to really like it. For batch printing it flat out flys. For large prints it is amazing. I can switch between roll paper, cassette or manual feed just by selecting my presets in LR.

I like the control of printing on my own. I also like the cost effectiveness for larger prints. (this doesn't take into account for the purchase of the printer) For small prints, you can't beat the price of a lab like bay photo. You just have to price prints so you don't loose your butt either way. I print all of my own flyers, biz cards, print samples, etc. I love the flexibility of it. I always just wish I could do even bigger prints. But that is much more $$$ all around. If I could just do 24" But if I could do 24" I would just want to do 36" and 48" So next printer will be a giant.

W.W. Webster · May 23, 2012

I also use a Canon Pro 9000 and highly recommend it, but don't expect printing your own to be cheap. It is extremely expensive compared with commercial services, but being in total control? Priceless!

Zerodog · May 23, 2012

I am not sure how much more $$$ printing at home is once you have a printer. With my 4900 the ink lasts forever. But it is $$$ when it runs out. Paper is not so bad. Here is what I have loaded in my cassette. Ilford Smooth Pearl 8.5x11 in a 100 sheet pack is $45. That is .45 a sheet. So an 8x10 costs less than $1 to print on that printer. 2 5x7s are about the same or less that .50 per print. Not too bad. The problem is smaller printers drink ink. The ink for my 2880 costs almost 10x more than the 4900.

W.W. Webster · May 23, 2012

The cost of the printer is negligible in the overall scheme of things - put that cost right out of your mind. It's just the price of admission. Printers are priced to lock users into expensive ink - that's where the profits are!

And I don't agree that paper is cheap, either! Every time I hit the 'print' button, a cacophony of cash register bells start ringing.

But I still like the control I have.

MomaZunk · May 23, 2012

I bought the Epson 3880 earlier this year because of a couple of prints that came back from the pro labs just wrong...
Yes, I could have spent a little more time fine tuning my output with the print lab, but the Epson rebate was in effect and I wanted more control of my fine art prints...not to mention immediate gratification.

I like playing with papers, and I find myself now developing the images with the final media in mind.

As far as costs are concerned, 8x10's and smaller on standard paper are breakeven to cheaper with a lab.

With larger prints I save between $5-$10 per print, but I loose some of that advantage when taking into account ink switching between matt and photo black and managing plugged ports.

You will need to print routinely, both using the photo and matt black to keep the ports from plugging. I recently went 6 weeks without printing a matt image, and I had plugged ports this week when I switched to my Entrada paper.

I also print more than I ever did, so there are additional costs there. And you will need to get a nice stock of paper in various types, so there is inventory to front.

With all that being said, I am loving my epson and the printing freedom I now have.

The epson rebate offer is still going on. So you could get an Epson 3880 for under $385:
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" height="92" width="192"><colgroup><col style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:4169;width:86pt" width="114"> <col style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:2852;width:59pt" width="78"> </colgroup><tbody><tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt;width:86pt" height="20" width="114">Amazon</td> <td class="xl65" style="width:59pt" align="right" width="78">$1,114</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" height="20">Less Included Ink</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">-$480</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" height="20">Less Rebate</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">-$250</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td style="height:15.0pt" height="20">Printer cost</td> <td class="xl65" align="right">$384:D</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
I found Luminous Landscape a good resource for printers.

MomaZunk · May 23, 2012

Oh, here are my estimated print costs: these are pretty close based on the epson log data. You'll notice the paper is really the dominant cost.

					Printed Area				LAB	Home
	Manu	Name	Cut Size	Paper Cost	Length	Width	Ink Cost	Total	Min Price	Savings
	Epson	Premium Glossy	4 x 6 (A6)	$0.12	4	6	$0.17	$0.29	$0.29	$0.00
	Moab	Entrada Rag Bright 190	4 x 6 (A6)	$0.30	4	6	$0.21	$0.51	$0.59	$0.08
	Epson	Premium Glossy	5 x 7	$0.34	5	7	$0.25	$0.60	$0.99	$0.39
	Moab	Entrada Rag Bright 190	5 x 7	$0.50	5	7	$0.31	$0.80	$1.29	$0.49
	Moab	Slickrock Metallic Pearl	5 x 7	$0.52	5	7	$0.25	$0.77	$1.29	$0.52
	Epson	Ultra Premium Luster	8.5 x 11 (Letter)	$0.53	8	10	$0.58	$1.11	$1.99	$0.88
	Moab	Entrada Rag Bright 190	8.5 x 11 (Letter)	$1.12	8	10	$0.70	$1.82	$2.49	$0.67
	Moab	Slickrock Metallic Pearl	8.5 x 11 (Letter)	$0.90	8	10	$0.58	$1.48	$2.49	$1.01
	Moab	Slickrock Metallic Pearl	A4 (8.27 x 11.69)	$0.94	8	10	$0.58	$1.52	$2.49	$0.97
	Epson	Ultra Premium Luster	11.7x16.5" (A3)	$1.24	10	15	$1.08	$2.32	$4.99	$2.67
	Moab	Entrada Rag Bright 190	11 x 17	$1.88	10	15	$1.32	$3.20	$8.59	$5.39
	Epson	Ultra Premium Luster	11.7x16.5" (A3)	$1.24	11	14	$1.11	$2.35	$6.99	$4.64
	Moab	Entrada Rag Bright 190	11 x 17	$1.88	11	14	$1.35	$3.23	$8.79	$5.56
	Moab	Slickrock Metallic Pearl	13 x 19	$2.52	11	14	$1.11	$3.63	$8.79	$5.16
	Moab	Entrada Rag Bright 190	11 x 17	$1.88	11	17	$1.64	$3.52	$13.59	$10.07
	Moab	Slickrock Metallic Pearl	13 x 19	$2.52	12	18	$1.56	$4.08	$13.20	$9.12
	Moab	Slickrock Metallic Pearl	13 x 19	$2.52	13	19	$1.78	$4.30	$21.59	$17.29
	Moab	Slickrock Metallic Pearl	A2 (16.54 x 23.39)	$3.60	16	20	$2.31	$5.91	$19.99	$14.08
	Moab	Slickrock Metallic Pearl	13 x 19	$2.52	5	17	$0.61	$3.13	$13.20	$10.07
	Epson	Ultra Premium Luster	11.7x16.5" (A3)	$1.24	5	16	$0.58	$1.82	$4.99	$3.17
CARDS	Moab	Entrada Rag Bright 190	8.5 x 11 (Letter)	$1.12	5	8	$0.35	$1.47	$3.65	$2.18
CARDS	Moab	Entrada Rag Bright	7x10	$1.16	5	7	$0.31	$1.47	$4.65	$3.18

Overfocused · May 23, 2012

If you end up making lots of prints for customers, it is definitely worth the investment and learning process. It is actually cheaper than commercial services, unlike what others are saying here... as long as you do your homework. However, that is if you have time, which is the biggest roadblock for getting into self printing. If I had a lot of business, I'd definitely search for the most efficient Epson large format printer in my budget and then go hog wild

Plus, there are some legitimately professional bulk ink products out there that are tested, reviewed, and equal to or better than Epson ink. Lyson Cavepaint is one of them, and is I think 1/3 the cost of Epson ink. It has nearly all the gamut, fade resistance and fade life expectancy too. Its been awhile since I've looked into bulk ink, so there are probably more companies making better ink formulas now than before.

Pupator · May 23, 2012

You guys are saying its cheaper when you factor out the cost of the printer - which I don't think is a fair comparison. Still, even at that, I'm not paying 29c for my 4x6s. I've never heard anyone suggest that printing at home is the more economical option. Do you have some numbers to back that up?

Overfocused · May 24, 2012

If all you want are 4x6's then yeah, a lab or whatever-mart will be cheaper. But, if you want to do a larger volume of professional prints all the time, it cuts the cost doing it yourself, pretty much on anything over 4x6s. And, doing it with the most economic materials of equal quality, I.E. not using Epson ink because its a ripoff (Yes, its top-notch but still a rip) will gain even more savings.

There are plenty of numbers a couple of posts above...

Once you start printing archival quality material 16x24 artwork for $4 each it gets really fun

But, its never worth it if you're not going to make enough prints.

Zerodog · May 24, 2012

You can't compare printing with a high end printer at home to walmart. Walmart pricing will beat you. But this is far from an apples to apples comparison. I don't even print 4x6 unless it is some sort of special request. It just is too small to display a nice picture. I am also a sucker for thick paper. You don't get that with most labs. A nice image printed on awesome paper impresses people and gives value to your work. Illford smooth pearl at 260gsm is significantly more substantial feeling than Epson Luster 190gsm for about the same price. Epson Hot press bright is just flat out amazing looking for a matte paper. It is cotton based and retains so much detail for a matte paper that it is rediculous. Things look 3d on this paper and look like you can jump into an image. At 340gsm it is very substantial. It doesn't feel like normal paper. It feels $$$$$ and special. It feels like something from a museum. You will not get this control from most labs. And if you do, it is $$$. Your not gonna get it from Wally's or Costco. There are so many variations in paper. They all have good and bad qualities to them. But in the end you get to pick what you think is the best to display your work. And you have control over the final product. Yes some paper is expensive. But you get what you are paying for. And for the most part, you don't get that choice from a lab.

W.W. Webster · May 24, 2012

Zerodog wrote: »

I don't even print 4x6 unless it is some sort of special request. It just is too small to display a nice picture.

I print them as a final check on colour reproduction before committing to the cost of printing an enlargement, usually on A3+ paper.

Pupator · May 24, 2012

Redacted. I forgot for a minute how pointless it is to disagree with someone on the Internet.

ecphotoman · May 27, 2012

Pupator wrote: »

You guys are saying its cheaper when you factor out the cost of the printer - which I don't think is a fair comparison. Still, even at that, I'm not paying 29c for my 4x6s. I've never heard anyone suggest that printing at home is the more economical option. Do you have some numbers to back that up?

I think they might mean when you factor the cost compared to the quality.

I got some 4x6's the other day for 9cents from sn@pf!sh. It was awesome till I opened the package and realized how shitty the print quality was.

sent from mobile

Photogbiker · May 27, 2012

ecphotoman wrote: »

I think they might mean when you factor the cost compared to the quality.

I got some 4x6's the other day for 9cents from sn@pf!sh. It was awesome till I opened the package and realized how shitty the print quality was.

sent from mobile

I didn't realize they were that cheap, wow. I downloaded the profiles from Costco and do most of my quick 4x6 and 8x10 stuff there. Quality is good, especially for proofs and fun shots I give away to friends. .13 per print for 4x6.

I think MamaZ did a nice job of laying out the costs. Basically for a 4x6 or even 5x7 which, as Zerodog said, I probably wouldn't consider a professional presentation then the Costcos or Walmarts can't be beat cost wise. That is assuming you can spend a few minutes to get acceptable prints. Can't discount the individual store also and how they maintain their machine.

When you get larger and want more control and the option to use a lot of different papers it might be cheaper to do it at home, but there is a time commitment. A larger commitment to get proficient at it and then an ongoing commitment to do the printing. And if you don't print regularly don't forget maintenance on dried out nozzles, etc. PITA.

To answer the printer cost question is a bit harder. How many prints per year will you do? How long does a printer last, or until you want to upgrade? Assuming you print on a $1,000 printer for your larger or presentation quality stuff and you use it for 3 years before upgrading. You might print 200 prints per year or 2,000, who knows. Doing the math your printer cost might be 5 cents per print or 50 cents, your mileage may vary. I have an older Epson R1800 that still prints a beautiful image and cost about $400 8 years ago, but a higher volume pro would wear this out quickly and it is a bit slow.

I would agree with the "redacted" comment regarding not ignoring the printer cost, but the printer contribution to per print cost is highly variable by user as compared to other components. So the answer is don't ignore it, but do your own math to be accurate.

kdlanejr · May 27, 2012

Pupator wrote: »

You guys are saying its cheaper when you factor out the cost of the printer - which I don't think is a fair comparison. Still, even at that, I'm not paying 29c for my 4x6s. I've never heard anyone suggest that printing at home is the more economical option. Do you have some numbers to back that up?

My car is paid for, so I don't factor in the cost of my car when calculating my monthly operating expenses.

Same for my Epson 7900 printer. Like my car, it's paid for, so I only factor in consumables (ink, paper, shrink).

I don't have a wattmeter on the printer so I don't factor in the power to operate it either.

700ml's of ink at a time (one cartridge) averages $225/cartridge or thirty three cents / ml rounded up.

Epson premium luster is $96.80 for 200 sq. ft. or 27 cents per 8x10 or $1.08 for a 16 x 20, and $2.90 for a 24 x 36. This is the only the paper cost. Ink costs vary according to coverage.

Shrink drives these costs up somewhat, and is dependant on the volume you are printing.

mercphoto · May 29, 2012

kdlanejr wrote: »

My car is paid for, so I don't factor in the cost of my car when calculating my monthly operating expenses.

Same for my Epson 7900 printer. Like my car, it's paid for, so I only factor in consumables (ink, paper, shrink).

But you certainly can factor in mileage on that car, the wear and tear the business puts on it. That is a REAL COST, whether you realize it or not. And sorry, but not factoring in the cost of a large expensive printer into your cost of doing business is just short-sighted. Sorry but the dude is right, not factoring in the cost of the printer into the cost per print of doing it at home is not a valid comparison.

Zerodog · May 29, 2012

Here is something that I do with my printer to help pay for the cost of it. I print for people. Tune up images and print onto nice media. It isn't a huge part of what I do, but I always figure it helps pay for operating costs of paper, ink and of course the printer. But buying the printer was sort of like the cost of admission.

I compare this to developing film and making prints. Most people sent or still send this to a lab and they are fine with it. Others feel the need to be envolved in the process and build darkrooms. They develop their own techniques and process. It is an art. I like my digital darkroom. There is so much too it. You first get a nice printer, then figure out that your prints are the wrong color. Then you need to calibrate your monitor, find out about profiles, paper choice, handling. Oh and then you need to cut the paper! It was a real PITA to learn and it cost a lot to get set up. I stuck with it and figured it out. There is nothing like making prints yourself. Some people don't see it that way. But I love it.

Overfocused · May 29, 2012

School helps with the trial and error part if you have the time for it... it costs a lot less to take a class where they already have all of that. At least, at my community college it did. They have a full blown color/print calibration course with an Epson 7700, 4800s, R320s and a lab full of imacs and i1Pro calibration. Its a great place to learn workflow quickly and without blowing a lot of $ initially. We also experimented with all kinds of papers gotten at discount via bidding at different vendors like B&H. After I got all that out of my system, I figured out what I wanted/needed and easily saved tuition costs by not buying unnecessary gear and buying the necessary stuff with already having experience on how to use it. If one does it though I guess the professor has to know what he/she is doing, that makes a big difference, lol. The guy was there for 30 years and knew about everything, but I've heard about universities with terrible programs since the prof is only there for a job and not for the photography. YMMV

Zerodog · May 30, 2012

Just made an awesome 16x20 on some Epson Hotpress Bright. I figure the cost of this paper at 16cents per inch on the 50ft roll. Paper size was 17x21. Printer uses 2" to cut print to size for 23" total. Cost for paper was $3.68. I need to run a report for a really accurate number for ink. But I always double the cost of paper to estimate it. This way I am always covered. So $7 for a 16x20 print on some of the nicest paper around? Not too bad. The closest thing I can image to this is a watercolor Giclee. From Bay photo for this size is $52. This doesn't include shipping.

CatOne · May 30, 2012

I've printed myself before.

It is a lot of work. Also, printers are harsh mistresses. You REALLY have to print A LOT so the ink doesn't dry up, and you often will make many, many mistakes at the beginning, and any time you go more than a week or so without printing.

I found it wasn't worth the effort or frustration for me. I had an Epson 3800 for about 20 years, and over that time I made about 10 prints that I hung up. Then I sold the printer for about $1000 less than I paid for it.

Like owning a boat: The best days are the days you buy it, and the day you sell it

Seriously, though… if you enjoy the process it's worth it. It's probably a better call economically and quality-wise if you go with something like Bay Photo, though. And you can't make metal or canvas prints on a printer.

Zerodog · May 30, 2012

You can make canvas prints all day on a 3800. I think canvas is a poor choice for most printing though. It just seems to be the most exotic standard offering at most labs. I go in spurts printing. Sometimes tons. Sometimes not for a while. Knock on wood. I have never had problems with either epsons with clogged nozzles or dry ink. Maybe I print just enough to keep em working?

Overfocused · May 30, 2012

Zerodog wrote: »

You can make canvas prints all day on a 3800. I think canvas is a poor choice for most printing though. It just seems to be the most exotic standard offering at most labs. I go in spurts printing. Sometimes tons. Sometimes not for a while. Knock on wood. I have never had problems with either epsons with clogged nozzles or dry ink. Maybe I print just enough to keep em working?

Yeah I've never had any clog problems either... I've gone 4 months without printing before on an R2200 and ink expired 2 years past date, and it worked just fine. Same for my Artisan 710 office printer with a generic bulk ink system. Also the printers when I went to college, most of them worked even after a month between semesters (I talked to the lab assistants a lot)

I think certain machines might have problems with repeated dry outs, but most of them don't. Like, once a little ink starts to dry, its like a blood clot and snowballs and makes future dry outs much more probable, if not completely cleaned out. Or maybe a micro flaw in the nozzle that causes it to be more probable to clot... you'd never know though unless you replaced that

Montec · June 3, 2012

I have the Epson 7880 and find the quality second to none. I should mention I also use the Imageprint RIP.
However. After several years of using it I find that it is expensive for the home/hobbyist like myself to use. If I am printing more than 10 8x10's I will usually go to WHCC.

What having the unit at home is great for is coming home from a days shooting and processing and printing your 24x36 masterpiece on any paper you like, including canvas.

You might also find that if you order a large format print from a lab they usually are printing then on the large Epson's so they must be cost effective. Otherwise they would not be in business very long.
For me it is the convenience, not the costs.

Does anyone do their own photo printing?

Comments